Live data from Hacker News

The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

wsj.com

1–10 of 253 posts

Re: The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

#6
Comparing stock variables (Pension liability shortfall) vs. flow variables (GDP, a rate of annual output) is a mistake that peeves me to no end.

That said, the pension shortfall is a disaster playing out in slow motion. We're just waiting for the hard cash constraints to bite - when they do it's not going to be pretty.

Re: The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

#7
post #4

Its funny that the government is as bad with money as the people. Truly a good representation.

The problem isn't really "bad with money", it's more "benefit from making promises that someone else has to try to fulfill".

Re: The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

#8
>For the past century, a public pension was an ironclad promise

Let's not pretend like this was ever seriously going to be sustainable. It's just a big middle finger to future generations while an opportunistic generation got to suck the system dry in prosperous times then peace out.

Re: The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

#9
The choice is raising taxes, reducing spending elsewhere, or demanding workers give up the pensions they were promised. Somehow I doubt anyone is going to agree to pay more in taxes to cover pensions in their state or city. After all, why should the government keep its promises (especially if it means we have to pay for it)?

Re: The Pension Hole for U.S. Cities and States Is the Size of Japan’s Economy

#10

>For the past century, a public pension was an ironclad promise Let's not pretend like this was ever seriously going to be sustainable. It's just a big middle finger to future generations while an opportunistic generation got to suck the system dry in prosperous times then peace out.

> Let's not pretend like this was ever seriously going to be sustainable.

There’s a bit of nuance to it. Predictions were made based on historical market returns we’re only now discovering are unrealistic going forward (7-8% historically, 4-5% predicted going forward).

The only issue is that no “relief valve” was constructed in the event predicted returns turned out to be inadequate to fully fund the system, triggering benefits cuts. This is the part that is generationally regressive.

Of course, there is no benefit to anyone whose wants to solve this prior to insolvency, only pain. So the sinking ship continues and the band plays on. Taxes, local, state, and federal, are going up eventually to pay for all of this. Plan accordingly.

Post reply on HN